RESUMO
Objective To compare the durability and cost-effectiveness of slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water(SAEOW),ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA) and glutaraldehyde (GA) in two conditions,i.e.,continuous machine cleaning and continuous manual cleaning.Methods The maximal numbers of endoscopes which were disinfected by the three disinfectants at its minimal effective concentration,as well as the corresponding costs were compared.The cost-effectiveness of three disinfectants were evaluated with revenue-incremental cost analysis.Results The number of endoscopes disinfected by ortho-phthalaldehyde was larger than that by two other disinfectants,140 ± 2 by machine wash and 226 ± 1 by hand washing;followed by glutaral disinfectant,88 ± 2 and 108 ± 2 by machine wash and hand wash,respectively;slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water disinfected the least endoscopes,34 ± 2 and 39 ± 1 by machine wash and hand wash.There were significant differences among these three disinfectants (all P ＜ 0.05).Compared with GA,one more Yuan invested to OPA yielded 2.24 yuan more under the condition of machine wash and 3.14 yuan more under the condition of hand wash.Compared with GA,one Yuan invested in SAEOW produced 47.14 yuan by machine wash and 45.6 Yuan by hand wash.Conclusion Under full workload,orthophthalaldehyde shows the best durability among the three disinfectants,while slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water shows the highest economic benefit.
RESUMO
Objective To evaluate the feasibility of slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water for the disinfection of gastrointestinal endoscopes.Methods Electrolyzed oxidizion water generator was utilized to produce the water,which was applied for the disinfection of gastrointestinal endoscopes.The disinfectant efficiency and effect were evaluated.Results A total of 215 samples were taken for bacterial culture after the disinfection.The mean sterilization efficiency of slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidized water and 2％ glutaraldehyde by machine were 99.92％ and 99.85％,respectively,while the mean sterilization efficiency were 99.85％ and 99.84％ by manual disinfection.There were no statistical significance between the two groups.The effective rates of both groups were 100％.No deformation or aging was observed in the endoscopes.The disinfectant caused no damage to the cleansing and disinfection.Conclusion It is feasible to apply slightly acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water to the disinfection of endoscopes.
RESUMO
[Objective] To compare the disinfection effect of different disinfectants on disinfection effect of laryngeal endoscope,and seek for a more safe and effective disinfectant for laryngeal endoscope.[Methods] 180 laryngeal endoscope were divided into three groups with 60 of them in each group.Acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water(AEOW),2％ glutaraldehyde and orthophthalaldehyde were used for disinfection.Three minutes and five minutes after disinfection,the samples were got and underwent bacterial detection.The disinfection effect after three minutes and five minutes was compared.[Results] The qualified rate of disinfection and cost between AEOW,2％ glutaraldehyde and orthophthalaldehyde showed distinct difference.[Conclusions] Using acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water in the disinfection of laryngeal endoscope has advantages of fast,effective,low-cost,which can be applied in the clinical work.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE To realize the disinfectant effect of medical instrument by acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water(EOW).METHODS Two groups of subjects participated in this study,and chlorinated disinfectant is used in the control group. Adopting stability test to measure effective chlorine and pH,and to compute the bacterium elimination rate after disinfection. Contrast the result with the experimental group.RESULTS The pH mean value and the effective chlorine mean value of two groups before and after instrument immersing in had no remarkable differences. Medical instrument sterilized by EOW for 5 minutes,the bacterium eliminative rate was 100.0%,while sterilized by the chlorinated disinfectant needed 30 minutes. Sterilizing effects of two groups were the same,but sterilizing time was obviously short in experimental group.CONCLUSIONS The acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water can be used in medical instrument's disinfection. The effect is good,and the process is fast. EOW is better than chlorinated disinfectant in saving of resources economizing.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE To determine the value of acidic electrolyzed oxidizing water (EOW) for disinfecting endoscopes in the children's hospitals. METHODS The detection methods of field sampling were used for monitoring the effect of EOW disinfection. Washed after-use endoscopes were disinfected by EOW for 3-5min. Bacteriological tests on samples of pre-and post-disinfection made for 30 samples of laryngoscopes,30 examples of gastroscopes and 16 samples of enteroscopes,which were selected randomly. RESULTS Through EOW disinfection,the bacteria were not found on the laryngoscopes. The total number of bacteria on digestive endoscopes was conformed to the Standards of Disinfection Techniques and no pathogenic bacteria were detected. CONCLUSIONS Applying EOW to disinfection of endoscopes for clinical purpose can fulfill the State Standards completely. EOW has strongly germicidal activity,also with characteristic aslo act rapidly,securely and environment friendly,and without any irritant odor. These rusults indicate a widely potential use of EOW as in children's hospitals,especially,with a positive significance in health care of pediatric patients.